This morning on MSNBC, two stories ran back to back. The first was about the FTC going after spyware.  The second was about Google's new beta product, Desktop Search.

Spyware, bad.  Desktop Search, good.  But what, really, is the difference?

Spyware, according to the FTC, "installs adware and other software programs that spy on consumers' Web surfing."  Desktop Search "keeps a copy of every Web page you visit and lists those pages in search results with the date and time of your visit."

A key difference is that you "consent" to the installation of Desktop Search, and you can un-install it easily. Spyware, by contrast, doesn't ask for permission.  But how informed is a consumer's "consent" to installation of Desktop Search?  Will people really understand that their instant message communications are being stored, that their "deleted" emails are actually retained for later searches, and that others using their PC will be able to access all of this information?

Over on Slashdot, people are excited (if a little contemptuous).  One comment:  "Software a son could love, but a mother could install."  Someone did say that Google gets a lot out of this --

Unless you choose to opt out, either during installation or at any time after installation, non-personal information collected will be sent to Google.

But that doesn't seem to be bothering a lot of the commentators -- Google says it's getting usage pattern data.  One Slashdot commentator did say:  "It's a lot less fun when your Google search finds your OWN porn."

The discussion about privacy and spyware and electronic places is incremental.  Today is a good snapshot day:  when mass media reported sound bites about "spyware" and "desktop search" back to back and no one experienced cognitive dissonance. 

Here's why we have no problem with "desktop search":  we aren't really worried about being watched.  We're really really worried about being in an abusive relationship with someone we don't even know.